The Effects of Pomegranate and Carvacrol on Methotrexate-Induced Bone Marrow Toxicity in Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of pomegranate (PMG) extract and carvacrol (CARV) on methotrexate (MTX)-induced oxidative stress and bone marrow toxicity. METHODS: Wistar albino rats (32 rats) were divided into four groups (n=8): Group 1 was control; Group 2 was given a single intraperitoneal injection of methotrexate (20 mg/kg); Group 3 was treated with carvacrol (73 mg/kg i.p.) one day before MTX (20 mg/kg i.p.) injection; and, Group 4 received a single dose of MTX (20 mg/kg i.p) while PMG was administered orally for seven days at 225 mg/kg. After animals were euthanized, blood samples were taken to evaluate hematological parameters and oxidative stress. In addition, the femur was cropped and bone marrow was extracted for examination. RESULTS: White blood cell count, hemoglobin, hematocrit and platelet count were found to be decreased in the MTX group, but these changes were prevented in the groups that received CARV and PMG. Furthermore, decreased bone marrow cellularity was found in the groups treated with MTX, whereas the PMG and CARV groups had cellularity similar to controls. Strikingly, oxidative stress increased in the MTX group, but was ultimately decreased in the rats that received the antioxidants PMG and CARV. CONCLUSION: Carvacrol and PMG were found to be protective against methotrexate-induced oxidative bone marrow damage. Use of these antioxidants, in combination with chemotherapeutics, may help to reduce some adverse effects of methotrexate.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".